California Overturns Gay Marriage Ban

State Supreme Court Ruling Paves Way To Become Second State To Allow Same Sex Marriage

(CBS/AP)  In a monumental victory for the gay rights movement, the California Supreme Court overturned a voter-approved ban on gay marriage Thursday in a ruling that would allow same-sex couples in the nation's biggest state to tie the knot.

Domestic partnerships are not a good enough substitute for marriage, the justices ruled 4-3 in striking down the ban.

Outside the courthouse, gay marriage supporters cried and cheered as the news spread.

Four years ago Jeanne Rizzo and her partner Pali Cooper joined the flood of gay couples getting married at San Francisco's City Hall - but they were in line to get married when the State Supreme Court ordered the ceremonies to stop, reports CBS News correspondent John Blackstone.

Thursday, Rizzo phoned her partner of 19 years from the courthouse steps. "I don't know the details of the ruling but i think we're getting married pretty soon," Rizzo said.

In the Castro, historically a center of the gay community in San Francisco, Tim Oviatt started crying while watching the news on TV.

"I've been waiting for this all my life," he said. "This is a life-affirming moment."

The city of San Francisco, two dozen gay and lesbian couples and gay rights groups sued in March 2004 after the court halted the monthlong wedding march that took place when Mayor Gavin Newsom opened the doors of City Hall to same-sex marriages.

"Today the California Supreme Court took a giant leap to ensure that everybody - not just in the state of California, but throughout the country - will have equal treatment under the law," said City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who argued the case for San Francisco.

The challenge for gay rights advocates, however, is not over.

A coalition of religious and social conservative groups is attempting to put a measure on the November ballot that would enshrine laws banning gay marriage in the state constitution.

The Secretary of State is expected to rule by the end of June whether the sponsors gathered enough signatures to qualify the marriage amendment, similar to ones enacted in 26 other states.

If voters pass the measure in November, it would trump the court's decision.

"This was a bitterly divided ruling with one of the dissenting judges calling it the majority reasoning a case of 'legal jujitsu,' the creation of constitutional rights where none should have existed," says CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen. "I think that means we'll now see this move into the political realm -- with perhaps an attempt to amend the constitution to explicitly prohibit these sorts of marriages.

"Because there was such a slight consensus here, a 4-3 ruling with a concurring opinion, other state court judges who want to look to this case for guidance will really be able to find whatever they are looking for now matter which side of the issue they are on. And that pretty much eliminates the precedential value of this ruling beyond California's borders," Cohen said.

"The majority declared that the distinction between traditional marriage and same sex marriage, as recognized and established by the state legislature, cannot withstand constitutional scrutiny and that the alternative, domestic partnerships, just don't serve as an adequate substitute as a matter of law," Cohen added.

California already offers same-sex couples who register as domestic partners the same legal rights and responsibilities as married spouses, including the right to divorce and to sue for child support.

But, "Our state now recognizes that an individual's capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation," Chief Justice Ron George wrote for the court's majority, which also included Justices Joyce Kennard, Kathryn Werdegar and Carlos Moreno.

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Marvin Baxter agreed with many arguments of the majority but said the court overstepped its authority. Changes to marriage laws should be decided by the voters, Baxter wrote. Justices Ming Chin and Carol Corrigan also dissented.

The conservative Alliance Defense Fund says it plans to ask the justices for a stay of their decision until after the fall election, said Glen Lavey, senior counsel for the group.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has twice vetoed legislation that would've granted marriage rights to same-sex couples, said in a news release that he respected the court's decision and "will not support an amendment to the constitution that would overturn this state Supreme Court ruling."

The last time California voters were asked to express their views on gay marriage at the ballot box was in 2000, the year after the Legislature enacted the first of a series of laws awarding spousal rights to domestic partners.

Proposition 22, which strengthened the state's 1978 one-man, one-woman marriage law with the words "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," passed with 61 percent of the vote.

The Supreme Court struck down both statutes with its sweeping opinion Thursday.

Lawyers for the gay couples had asked the court to overturn the laws as an unconstitutional civil rights violation that domestic partnerships cannot repair. A trial court judge in San Francisco agreed with gay rights advocates and voided the state's marriage laws in April 2005. A midlevel appeals court overturned his decision in October 2006.

[tcmofo33]

So now *** can experience the wonders of divorce, child support, spousal support and so on.

I don''t care if *** have a legal "union" or "partnership" or whatever they want to call it, (same benefits of marriage apply) but using the formal name of "marriage" is wrong in my opinion. A marriage is between a man and a woman...period.

[moneymcbush]

Now McCain and his new bathroom buddy Larry "Toe Tapper" Craig can move California and get hitched.

Here''s to the Happy Couple! Theyve been working so well together to Stop the new GI Bill, its a match made in Heaven(or in the second stall from the right.)

John McCain and Larry Craig: Together 4Ever

[sgtrds-e4]

YES! YES!! YES!!!

Could not get better news today and it''s about time!

[tcmofo33]

Lol they censored the word GHAY...

[brianp55]

With a divorce rate of approximately 50%, I''m not sure that there is anything particularly sacrosanct about marriage between a man and woman.

[acolton1]

VERY HAPPY its about time California Overturns Same-*** Marriage Ban.

I am happy as heck. Now all the Right Wing Super Conservative Bible Bangers Can go cry in their cool-aide, you lost this one. hahahahahaah.

[acolton1]

Now George W. Bush and Richard Cheney and have a buttt baby.

I am glad Calif. Overturns Same-*** Marriage Ban
very happy!!!!!!!

[bgwinnett]

Why not -- everyone should have the same right to be miserable I say.

[michellem99-2009]

I was not raised in the church. I they have all the rights as a people. Is it Ms and Ms. Mr and Mr. It is Mr and Ms. MAN and WOMAN..

[acolton1]

Now Missouri needs to pull their head out so my partner and I can get married. We have been together for 9+ years.

[sgtrds-e4]

Now Missouri needs to pull their head out so my partner and I can get married. We have been together for 9+ years.

Posted by acolton1 at 01:41 PM : May 15, 2008

My step-son and his partner got that one beat. They''ve been a couple for nearly 20 years. Though personally I still think he could do better.

;-)

[hypnotoad72]

They actually WANT to marry? Before I shunned their faux community, I was advocating for such relationships (though called "civil unions" because I respected religion too. The G@y community shunned me, calling me things like "unevolved". It took a while, but I realized what I should have known all along. There''s nothing to be proud of, it''s a sin, and their mainstream activities DO involve disease and selfishness, or "friends with benefits" at best.

I know there are exceptions to the rule, there are decent people out there, and people can do what they want. Just don''t expect me to sit through another parade where they wear only grass skits, lift them to prove they aren''t wearing underpants, and make parade floats look like certain body parts and demand everyone take them seriously. Humor is one thing, but flashing is not.

And they should be called "civil unions". The government and its people can decide who qualifies for civil unions. Let the religions decide what their use of "marriage" means and who is allowed.

Also, we all know Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed due to selfishness; the translations skewed slightly to make g@ys scapegoats. Of course, define ''selfish''...

Also, Roseanne never needed to have apologized for some comments she made over a year ago. She was right. Why apologize for telling the truth?

[extremophil]

Big whup. The queerist land in the world now has same sexx marriage.

[superdem]

Liberty and justice for ALL. I''m sure the Republicans are going to go nuts - AGAIN (yawn). Here''s their favorite issue ! Quick, turn on C-SPAN and watch all the Republicans rush to the Senate and House floors to cry about bestiality and what God wants for America ! We can die in Iraq for Democracy, but try a little here and WHAMO, they agree with the Taliban.

[cpaide]

"Could not get better news today and it''s about time!"
Posted by SgtRDS-E4

Yes, dear, so now you can marry your lover--and, hopefully, get a real job.

This ruling also invalidates state laws requiring marriage to be between a man and ONE woman, so maybe the Texas Mormons can move to California and be happy there.

[nothappyatall]

but using the formal name of "marriage" is wrong in my opinion. A marriage is between a man and a woman...period.

Posted by tcmofo33"

Well Im married to my five dogs, so I also don''t care what it''s officially called.

youtube.com/user/dersheeple

[sgtrds-e4]

Yes, dear, so now you can marry your lover--and, hopefully, get a real job.

Posted by cpaide at 01:45 PM : May 15, 2008

Actually dear I''ve been married to my lover for the past 15 years. Her name is Joan. What I wonder about is why when someone supports Ga*y rights that bigots like you automatically assume that person is Ga*y. Some of us straight people support Ga*y rights because IT''S THE RIGHT THING TO DO!!

[haoli25]

Isn''t California long overdue for a devastating earthquake? What a sick state!

[dorlockt]

Liberty and justice for ALL. I''''m sure the Republicans are going to go nuts - AGAIN (yawn). Here''''s their favorite issue ! Quick, turn on C-SPAN and watch all the Republicans rush to the Senate and House floors to cry about bestiality and what God wants for America ! We can die in Iraq for Democracy, but try a little here and WHAMO, they agree with the Taliban.

Posted by superdem at 01:45 PM : May 15, 2008


So in response, you break balls about people who believe in God? No one really cares that you want to have *** with human feces. It''s the fact the gov''t will now be paying you to do it in CA.

[nothappyatall]

Also, we all know Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed due to selfishness; the translations skewed slightly to make g@ys scapegoats.
Posted by hypnotoad72"

You mean the translated fable was skewed even more to justify subversion, attacks and murder of innocent people.

[lochlan-2009]

Good for them. To many religious nut jobs in this country trying to tell you what you can and can''t do. They keep trying to turn AMERICA into an authoritarian government. The last seven years have been the worst I''ve seen.

[sgtrds-e4]

Posted by lochlan at 01:51 PM : May 15, 2008

I''ll second that, but just them a few more minutes here and the religious loonies on this blog will come slithering in to try it again.

[hypnotoad72]

Since when is some dude sticking his schvantze up another dudes cabbootie a humanistic act?

Posted by DaVicar2
-----------------------

Not all g@ys use that particular opening, but many g@y supporters are equally blind to that belief. It''s their closed-mindedness, regardless of being for or against anything.

And, no, it''s not a humanistic act. Never mind disease, the internal organs can be torn or perforated. I''d hate to be the bloke having gone to the ER because his buddy was "too big".

Lastly, some otherwise intelligent and talented people died because of what they did in the sack and you bet that''s saddening!

I may disagree with many things homosexuals do, and some of those heteros do and those doings are simply WRONG in the first place (going up certain parts, lots of one night stands, turning lovemaking into something cheap and tawdry or hateful), but I would never discriminate or anything else, nor am I homophobic - I do not fear them. If I did, would I be bold enough to say what the things they are known for doing are hurtful and selfish, just like when heteros do the same things? I just wish they''d turn their lives around before doing something that causes an untimely death. THAT is as much a valid reason for being pro-life as any other, in my book. But it''s never really about people, in the end (no pun intended). It''s about empty politics. That''s why so many politicians or musicians end up getting caught in bed or in the public rest room (yuck!)

[cpaide]

"Actually dear I''ve been married to my lover for the past 15 years. Her name is Joan. What I wonder about is why when someone supports Ga*y rights that bigots like you automatically assume that person is Ga*y. Some of us straight people support Ga*y rights because IT''S THE RIGHT THING TO DO!!"
Posted by SgtRDS-E4

Calm down, dear. You don''t need to hide behind a "Strong, Straight Guy" facade any more. You can come out now--especially on this message board where the friendly and free expression of ideas and lifestyles is quite the norm.

[superdem]

This has nothing to do with churches. They can continue to be as miserable, bigotted, discriminating and self-righteous as they''ve always been. But down at the civil Justice of the Peace, where there''s separation of church and state, a fundamental freedom, people can get married if they want to. What does Democracy look like ? This is what Democracy looks like. Three cheers for California - until their ugly conservatives get cranked up.

[waterandsand]

You have a right to support gay rights and i have a right not to, But dont call me a bigot because i dont follow your beliefs.

[naucoming4u]

So now, the fascist religious wing-nuts will claim the next big natural disaster that strikes anywhere in California...

... as God''s punishment for the people of California because of this decision to allow g-a-y marriage.

[hypnotoad72]

Who cares?

Posted by globlwarning
----------------------

Ricky Martin? (he went from saying "Who cares, what difference does it make what people do" to "Hey everyone, my career may be over but you guessed me right, I am gay and livin'' la vida loca!")

George Michael? (Getting it in public restrooms is the "culture", he must be their emissary because a hetero saying the same of *** would be called a "homophobe"...) I genuinely do feel sorry for his ex; I recall the controversy George whipped up at the time...

[roger_inkart]

My, the conservatives are taking a beating! The GOP has lost THREE straight special elections in very red districts, yesterday polar bears got listed by the feds as endangered and now this.

My suggestion to you conservatives? Give up while you''re still behind :)

[jack3213]

This opens the door for many things that will not only complicate the simplicity in life but create conflicts on many levels- insurance-child rights-etc. I am not surprised CA overturned this- but I am surprised when MA did. Nothing against what you choose to do in private- but this is dangerous territory.

[sgtrds-e4]

Posted by cpaide at 01:53 PM : May 15, 2008


See what I mean? Ignorant bigotry.

[waterandsand]

cool,, pretty soon we''ll be able to marry are pets to get some tax breaks

[sgtrds-e4]

You have a right to support gay rights and i have a right not to, But dont call me a bigot because i dont follow your beliefs.

Posted by waterandsand at 01:55 PM : May 15, 2008

I''m not. I''m calling you a bigot because you hate people for reasons that are none of your effing business.

[dinkydog1]

Just in time to get all the conservatives in an uproar for the 2008 election.

[anopinion1]

California already offers same-*** couples who register as domestic partners the same legal rights and responsibilities as married spouses, including the right to divorce and to sue for child support.

AS STATED IN THE ARTICLE ABOVE

MAY I ASK HOW YOU CAN SURE FOR CHILD SUPPORT WHEN 2 PEOPLE OF THE SAME *** CAN''T HAVE A CHILD TOGETHER????????????

[fibonacci_]

Sad day for bigots everywhere :(

[underdogus]

AMERICA IS DOOMED!!! REMEMBER SODOM & GAMORRAH!!! he,he........

[jimfinster]

Red meat for neocons.

At last, an "important" issue they can all rally around!

[usbrit-2009]

"A coalition of religious and social conservative groups is attempting to put a measure on the November ballot that would enshrine California''s current laws banning gay marriage in the state constitution."

Well surprise, surprise, the Neanderthals aren''t going to take this lying down. Do State Constitution Issues require a 2/3 majority for passage? If so, they''ve got no hope in CA.

In the meantime; Great job CA.

[gwagener]

The CA Supreme Court has handed the Republicans a powerful tool for the Nov election.

[jimfinster]

AMERICA IS DOOMED!!! REMEMBER SODOM & GAMORRAH!!! he,he........

Posted by underdogus



We surely are doomed with idiots like you. Finish mopping the hallway!

[waterandsand]

hey srgt,, its are fkn business when it affects our taxes,,

[cpaide]

"See what I mean? Ignorant bigotry."
Posted by SgtRDS-E4

"Sad day for bigots everywhere :("
Posted by fibonacci_

Please, dears, don''t use the "B" word. It''s so unfriendly and un-g@y. AND it makes you sound like bigots--whoops!

[tcmofo33]

"This has nothing to do with churches. They can continue to be as miserable, bigotted, discriminating and self-righteous as they''''ve always been." --Superdem

Uh, so let me get this straight...you think that the church is supposed to say that all sins are, "ok." So the churches should bend over backwards to those who are violating the exact verbage of the books that their faith is founded on just so they aren''t discriminating??? What a whiner and of course they are going to disagree with it... You superdem are not a genious.

[naucoming4u]

cool,, pretty soon we''''''''ll be able to marry are pets to get some tax breaks
Posted by waterandsand at 02:00 PM

Hey whatever you wanna do with your pet is your business. I don''''t even want to hear about it.

Posted by dragonwagon5 at 02:02 PM : May 15, 2008
..............

Well, he won''t get any tax breaks, but you can be sure he will be breaking something else!

[jimfinster]

You superdem are not a genious.

Posted by tcmofo33



Ummm, do you mean "genius"? LOL

[superdem]

Always the ugly images, gotta make something that''s none of your business into something ugly. OK - here''s an image for ya - George and Barbara Bush gettin'' it on. AAAAAAAUUUUGHGHGHGHGH !!!!!!

[sgtrds-e4]

Uh, so let me get this straight...you think that the church is supposed to say that all sins are, "ok." So the churches should bend over backwards to those who are violating the exact verbage of the books that their faith is founded on just so they aren''''t discriminating??? What a whiner and of course they are going to disagree with it... You superdem are not a genious.

Posted by tcmofo33 at 02:05 PM : May 15, 2008

No, churches need to stay the f out of other peoples business. They don''t run this country, free people do.

[lorinkundert]

Another crystal clear example of the courts overturning the explicit will of the people, complete defiance of the Constitution. See 10th amendment.

[roger_inkart]

The CA Supreme Court has handed the Republicans a powerful tool for the Nov election.

Posted by gwagener at 02:05 PM : May 15, 2008

With gas at over 4 bucks a gallon and the economy tanking? Hardly. People are only concerned about these issues when the economy is humming. Futhermore, the evangelicals are receeding in power and influence, and people are waking up to the fact that they are just being used by politicians when issues like this are pushed.

Those days are gone, hopefully forever.